He’s sui generis — he began working in Michigan government at age 25 in the spring of 1966, and he’s still working in state government until later this week at age 85. Nobody else, anywhere, can make such a claim.
William C. Whitbeck has worked four different stints for three different governors (George Romney, Bill Milliken, and John Engler) and one U.S. Secretary of Housing & Urban Development (Romney). He capped off his career as a judge on Michigan’s Court of Appeals for more than 17 years. . He was appointed by Engler to the court in 1997, elected to a full six-year term in 1998, and re-elected in 2004 and 2010. The state Supreme Court appointed him chief judge of the CoA in 2001 for three two-year terms. Whitbeck retired as a judge on November 21, 2014.
Prior to serving on the bench, Whitbeck was director of the Office of State Employer from 1991-93; director of policy for the Public Service Commission; director of the Detroit area office for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; an administrative assistant to Governor George Romney; a legislative analyst for the Department of Commerce; and, today, as a member of the Civil Service Commission’s Employment Relations Board (ERB). The only branch he has not served in is the Legislature, although he frequently testified there when he was the CoA’s chief judge.
He also worked for more than a decade as an attorney in private practice with the Dykema Gossett and Honigman law firms and as general counsel for several private real estate and retail entities. He spent time in the U.S. Army as well. He is the past chairperson of the Michigan Historical Commission, a fellow of the Michigan and American Bar Foundations, and was a member of the Michigan Law Revision Commission. In 2007, he won the State Bar of Michigan’s short-story competition with “In the Market,” a story of bootlegging and murder set in Prohibition-era Michigan.
He followed that up with the publication of a novel, “To Account for Murder,” based on the assassination in 1945 of state Senator Warren Hooper (R-Albion). Author! Author!
Whitbeck, originally from Southwest Michigan, received a bachelor’s degree from the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University and his J.D. from the University of Michigan. He and his wife Stephanie live in a completely renovated 145-year-old home in downtown Lansing.
He will retire from his part-time job on the ERB on January 1, 2026.
After a lifetime spent in and around the political arena, here’s what Bill Whitbeck says is most important to the people of Michigan:
“During my time in the field, I have made ‘brief remarks’ at great length, shaken thousands of hands, eaten chicken dinners of seemingly endless variety, gotten lost all too often while driving down lonely back roads to obscure locations, and perhaps have learned something about what the people want in their elected officials. In my experience, they don’t want or expect perfection, but they do want at least three things.
“First, I think most people want integrity. I mean this in a homespun, down-to-earth sort of way. I think that most people expect public officials to devote honest effort and long hours to their jobs. They expect legislators to be there to cast informed votes on matters both great and small. They expect those in the executive branch to act when action is needed and to have the intellectual fortitude to decline to act when no action is necessary. And they expect judges not only to deliberate fairly, but also to decide promptly.
“In short, I think most people expect the officials they elect to have the integrity to attend to their obligations every day, not just with easy words but also with hard work.
“Secondly, I think most people want a degree of clarity from their elected officials. It is not difficult to spout windy generalities rationalizing votes in the legislature, to grind out cotton candy press releases justifying executive branch actions, to produce endless pages of legal gibberish supporting judicial decisions But it is very difficult to explain those votes, those actions, and those decisions in clear, simple, and understandable English. And because it is difficult, that is exactly what most people want.
“Thirdly, I think most people expect a certain amount of modesty in their elected officials. They know that self-promotion comes with the job and that self-importance is often not far behind. But they also know that some of our bedrock principles – the idea of separation of powers, the idea of limited government, the idea of the reservation of powers to the people – mean that our elected officials are by definition constrained to certain responsibilities beyond which they cannot and should not go.
“As a consequence, our citizens know that no senator can, even with years of experience and accumulated clout, command a given result with his or her vote alone. They know that no governor can, even with the most Herculean efforts, reverse the direction of a bad economy. They know that no judge can, even with the best of motives, rewrite legislation to accord with that judge’s policy preferences.
“But in far too many cases our citizens do not get what they want from their elected officials. They want integrity, but too often they get intellectual and physical lethargy. They want clarity, but too often they get deliberate ambiguity. They want modesty, but too often they witness the clash of overweening, over-promising egos rather than the frank recognition of the limits inherent in our form of government.
“And perhaps for some of these reasons, many of our citizens are disappointed, even angered, by what they see in politics. But for all their disappointment and their anger, they still know that we elected officials can and should work hard at our jobs, that we can and should speak and write clearly, and that we can and should promise only what we can deliver. Surely, if we would but try, we can do these things. We all take an oath to perform the duties of our respective offices to the best of our abilities. That is what the people want and that is no less than what they deserve.”
In other words, people don’t really want anything other than what they think they should have been getting all along, but too often haven’t.
****************************************************
This assessment is basically correct.
Candice Miller was a Harrison Township housewife with two years of college education when she entered politics and scored political upset after political upset by conveying a humble, soft-spoken and non-confrontational demeanor and seeing her constituents as equals while reserving criticism toward politicians who truly deserved it. She as a Secretary of State tallied the vote total of any candidate for statewide office – and became the only statewide candidate to actually win Wayne County.
More recently, GOP Michigan House member Rylee Linting of Grosse Ile credited her upset at age 22 over Democratic incumbent Jamie Churches to her Turning Point training by Charlie Kirk in instilling humility, honesty and a desire to serve the public. She was vastly outspent and targeted by Dem party leaders as a fanatical right-winger – but the electorate disagreed. In 2018, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez electrified her district and scored an upset as the 29-year old waitress was viewed as more palatable to her district than a long-term political boss.
In the Michigan GOP and Michigan Democratic Party there has been in recent years pushback against the moneyed interests that controlled the respective organizations. Fealty to political bosses and moneyed vested interests is considered anathema by the electorate.
That should have been “GOP statewide candidate to actually win Wayne County.” As to Ms. Miller.
Bill Milliken won Wayne County
it in 1974. Otherwise you made me laugh when you talked about the hatemonger Kirk instilling “honesty, humility and a desire to serve the public. ]”
I do agree with you abou Candice Miller.
“Otherwise you made me laugh when you talked about the hatemonger Kirk instilling “honesty, humility and a desire to serve the public.”
Scurrilous claims of “hatemongering” are exactly what got Charlie Kirk killed. Your deceitful intensification of rhetoric to maximize political effect captures the imagination of the mentally ill left in this country. Of which there are many.
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, § 5 of the Michigan Constitution have no exemptions for “hatemongering”. Like the word “fascism”, hatemongering is a word now devoid of any substantial meaning, other than targeting so designated individuals for political exclusion and annihilation.
You have no right to put peoples’ lives at risk for sincerely held, entirely rational views.
You are correct – the First Amendment guarantees contained in the Free Speech Clause are among the broadest of any nation on Earth.
And SCOTUS has protected Communists as well as right-wing extremists; see Yates vs U.S. (1957) Brandenburg vs Ohio (1969).
The burning of the American flag by a Marxist and protesting homosexuality by Westboro Baptist Church members in the vicinity of military funerals have been held to be protected by the U.S. Constitution.
I hope this issue of your The Ballenger Report is read by President Trump. With a little luck he might see in it an important feature in the idea of “what the people want in their elected officials” that he is lacking and that, if he could master/control, could lead to his getting what I believe he truly wants and deserves, recognition as a great president by future generations.
Sen. Warren Hooper, husband of my 5th grade music teacher, was assassinated in 1945 (not 1946).
Judge Whitbeck’s “To Account for Murder” changes the murder timeline. It places the murder of State Senator Harry Maynard in October of 1945, and most of the action in 1946. The actual murder of State Senator Warren Hooper occurred on January 11, 1945.
Many authors have confused the Hooper murder timeline and this has been a factor in the failure to positively identify the killer(s). My bet is Harry Fleischer, one of the worst Purple Gang psychokillers. Albion was the Number 2 locale for the Purples and Fleischer seems to have been trying to reestablish the Purples in Albion after the Italians destroyed them in Detroit. Think Hooper was killed because he was likely to disclose this revival at Sigler’s one man grand jury.
My Dear Mr. Ballenger:
You’re “Spot On.”
X Cheri
Congratulations Bill Whitbeck for articulating “the right stuff” needed to be a quality public servant in any of the three branches of government. Your opinion should also help us realize that term limits negates and eliminates the kind of institutional knowledge that cannot be automatically recycled with en masse changes in public servants.
Kudos to you Bill Ballenger for asking a person with a wealth and variety of public experiences to opine on what is becoming a significant concern in this new political paradigm of bi-polar “one ups man ship”.
Bill Whitbeck is considered one of the wise men of Michigan government much like Clark Clifford was called the wise man of Washington. Whitbeck advised Governors Romney, Milliken and Engler. He understood the bureaucracy and the nuances of the civil service. Bob Danhof and Bill Whitbeck were giants in their respective eras as Chief Judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals. As Bill Whitbeck turns the page serving Michigan, I hope he continues to write on Michigan history be it fiction or non-fiction.
Clark Clifford was indicted for fraud and bribery in connection with Bank of Commerce Credit International – and while not convicted due to health issues made a substantial payment in the millions to settle civil litigation in which he was a defendant.
That million new Epstein documents just discovered are from his time at BCCI. Epstein was an apt pupil of the Democratic powerbrokers and CIA slime which used BCCI to further their nefarious ends.
Bill Whitbeck was and is one of the most BRILLIANT men and jurists I have ever worked with.
I was Chair of Judiciary Appropriations when he was testifying before my Committee as Chief Judge, Court of Appeals. I have appeared in his Court , his Chambers and he has visited with me in my Law Office.
Whitbeck is a man with a brilliant intellect and sensitivity that was nurtured by Gov. George Romney and Gov Wm Milliken for 20 years
Also, Judge Whitbeck wrote a weekly column, which I religiously read for more than a decade in The Detroit Legal News
Finally, at my invitation, in black robe, Judge Whitbeck, visited the House of Representatives., while in Session, and it was my great honor to introduce him to several State Legislators and the House of Representatives.
Bill Whitbeck has taught all of us about his LEGACY of 1.) Integrity 2.) Degree of clarity-written and verbal 3.)Modesty and to always strive for the closest approximation of TRUTH
Well said
I hope many people will read my Comment above and follow the example of Bill Whitbeck and his legacy as a Judge, I’m just a practicing attorney who made a living, for more than 40 years, getting along with the people at the foot of Woodward and Jefferson.
Bill. Thank you for providing information about Mr. Whitbeck. In a time when people choose sides with tribal intensity, it is a refreshing reminder that many within government and extended institutions are focused on making a better Michigan. Most in our state have probably not known him.
I hope people take time to note that most people are good people. But, the exceptional that serve the public should be remembered for their sacrifice of time. Those with a short or confrontational fuse almost always are flushed from our memories.
Thank you for recalling someone who served Michigan long and well.
A tip of my hat to Judge Whitbeck. A job well done!
Thanks Bill, for this simple, clear statement from a gentleman of great experience. I remember Bill Whitbeck during his Dykema, Gossett years, when I was a young attorney interested in Republican politics and working in the same building (then known as the Michigan National Tower) in downtown Lansing. Even then, 40-some years ago, he was already regarded as an important figure in government. His stature now reflects not only knowing what people want in our officials, but in putting that knowledge into action.
Lansing has always been blessed with a plethora of attorneys for two major reasons – it is the seat of the state government and you had Cooley Law School downtown. Many of their grads settled in Lansing and many state employees hired by the Michigan Department of Attorney General moved into Lansing.
If one were to ask me—and several people have— for examples of integrity, I would cite Romney, Milliken, and Engler . . . and Dick Austin on the Democratic side. Not a hint of scandal ever touched any of them.
As for clarity, Liz Gleitcher at the Court of Appealls and Bridget McCormick on the Supreme Court come to mind, along with Bob Young on the Supreme Court and Antonin Scalia on the US Supreme Court. They all wrote clearly and concisely, foregoing the usual judicial oatmeal.
On modesty, how about Senators Robert Griffin and Phil Hart . . . they both knew the parameters of congressional power and they stayed within them. And I cannot overlook Frank Kelley and Jim Ryan, two Irish pols who, when they took their Pat and Mike act on the road (as they frequen did) were hilariously funny. . . .as was Zoltan Ferency on a good day..
These are my heroes, among others . . . and thanks for asking. All in all, it’s been one great, long ride and I have enjoyed (almost) every minute of it.
I asked someone at Honigman Miller who they respected most for integrity and they said Scott Romney. I remember when Scott accompanied his daughter, Ronna, to what probably was her first GOP state convention in 2008 and was introducing her to attendees. Scott was always a gentleman.
In the Michigan Court of Appeals, the jurist I most respected was Pat D’Onofrio. When he was an insurance defense counsel, plaintiff’s’ personal injury attorneys used him as a neutral arbitrator despite the fact he did just about all of his practice for insurers. Even though Pat was an Engler appointee, he wrote opinions in cases I was plaintiff counsel reversing dismissals of personal injury cases issued by Blanchard appointees.
The correct spelling is “Zolton” not Zoltan.
Zolton Ferency in 1966 became the first state Democratic Party chairman in the U.S. to publicly oppose the U.S. involvement in Vietnam – and paid a heavy price for it.
Ferency was the most morally outspoken Democrat in Lansing.
Joltin’ Zolton’s 1966 campaign was a comedy of errors. His close relationship with the Pied Piper (Robert F. Kennedy, Sr.) had the Hoffa loyalists over at Local 299 burning the midnight oil in their efforts to defeat him. The AFL-CIO was unenthusiastic and the the UAW membership didn’t respond to their leader’s entreaties.
Most of Joltin’ Zolton’s campaign workers were SDS types recruited through his friendship with John Sinclair. They didn’t relate well with the Democratic base of that era, which was quite similar to Trump’s base today. They also had other compelling interests which greatly reduced their effectiveness.
Joltin’ couldn’t even get the Downriver Hungarian vote. He refused to denounce the 1956 Soviet invasion of Hungary, which lost him both the Catholic and Protestant Hungarian votes. The spelling of his name also bothered them. The correct Hungarian spelling is Zoltán. Joltin’ Zolton managed to turn the Protestant Hungarians into committed Republicans for decades.
Don’t think Joltin’ Zolton made a big deal out of his opposition to the Vietnam War until late 1967, well after the Governor’s race. His muted opposition in 1966 was seen as an attempt to curry favor with Lou Gordon, who was influential but still far from his peak popularity during the later newspaper strike.
The Rambler had a cake walk.
Ferency was a Democratic Socialist – who NEVER win statewide office – except for Bernie Sanders.
In 1972, the Democrats were termed the party of “amnesty, acid and abortion”. They were demolished that cycle when George McGovern was the left-wing nominee for president.
Ironically, it was a Republican president – Gerald Ford – who granted amnesty to Vietnam-era draft evaders. Abortion was deemed a constitutional right in 1973 under the SCOTUS opinion in Roe vs. Wade. Acid stands alone as the right-wing’s last line of defense of that era.
The GOP should thank its lucky stars that Zolton Ferency ran for office – it guaranteed a GOP victory.
From Wikipedia:
“Proclamation 4483, also known as the Granting Pardon for Violations of the Selective Service Act, was a presidential proclamation issued by Jimmy Carter on January 21, 1977. It granted unconditional pardons to all Americans who evaded the draft in the Vietnam War by violating the Military Selective Service Act. It was implemented through Executive Order 11967”.
“Proclamation 4311 was a presidential proclamation issued by Gerald Ford, the president of the United States, on September 8, 1974, granting a full and unconditional pardon to Richard Nixon, his predecessor, for any crimes that he might have committed against the United States as president”.
Also from Wikipedia:
President Ford gave conditional amnesty in 1974 under Executive Order 11803 to draft evaders on September 16, 1974 if they agreed to work in public service for two years.
Jimmy Carter granted unconditional pardons to ALL 210,000 Vietnam-era draft evaders on Jan 21st, 1977 – the day after he assumed the presidency.
President Ford’s Executive Order 11803 was titled:
Establishing a Clemency Board to Review Certain Convictions of Persons Under Section 12 or 6 (j) of the Military Selective Service Act and Certain Discharges Issued Because of, and Certain Convictions for, Violations of Article 85, 86, or 87 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and to Make Recommendations for Executive Clemency with Respect Thereto
The Presidential Clemency Board (PCB) created granted exactly 736 pardons by 28 October 1975, when it closed up shop. The PCB dealt with the small subset of those who had been previously convicted or were then in legal process – not the 509,000 draft evaders and military deserters then still subject to prosecution. Those would be pardoned unconditionally by President Carter on 21 January 1977.
Well….will nobody mention the elephant (psychological, not political) in the room? Love you Bill, and wish what you wrote was still true. But if it were, our White House would look very different today. In every way possible. Too many of our fellow citizens have been hiding their true colors from the rest of us, and given a chance to show the worse of themselves are now in thrall to a man and his cabinet who have zero integrity, provide no clarity into what they are doing (mostly enriching themselves, their families and their cronies) and clearly do not understand the word modesty. We are a sliding into autocracy and a very large proportion of the electorate are all in. It can happen here. In fact, if we keep ignoring it, out of conviction or fear, it will happen here. The time for platitudes is long past. Confronting Trump is what men and women who crave integrity, clarity and modesty should be doing. Matt Hall has brought Trumpism to Michigan, undermining the integrity of the process in so many ways, purposely obfuscating his goals and strutting around in a most immodest fashion.
Sorry to be the naysayer in this warm room.
Nice try. Clinton, Obama, and Droolin’ Joe wrecked the U.S. government and weaponized DoJ against Trump and his supporters when he used Democratic corruption as a campaign issue.
Why do you think we are only now discovering the massive entitlement fraud across the country? It is quite likely that the entire federal government budget deficit during this century was the result of entitlement frauds?
Thank you for hiding your identify. It makes everything you say invalid.
I have no intention of being doxxed by you clowns and I have no ego which needs to be fed. My words stand on their own merit.
Your ignorance is even greater than your cowardice. But both are immense.
Yes
One word was missing from what voters want. “Accountability”. If there’s no accountability, there are no constraints. Look at the outrage of the left over the billions of dollars in fraud being uncovered by DOGE. It looks like Act Blue was chin-high in it, too. The party that wants men in your daughters’ locker room and illegal aliens getting free health care and maximum Social Security checks is the same party as Karl Marx.
Another anonymous…robot?…poster. You folks break every one of the attributes Mr..Whitbeck postulates as important. And show you are indeed as I suggest of the deplorables, without integrity, clarity or modesty. You are the problem. Unmask and face the daylight. Or stick with the dark side.
Silence Dogood
Publius
Phocion
Philo-Publius
Mark Twain
Abu Ammar
A Citizen of New Haven
A Countryman
A Pennsylvania Farmer
A Republican Federalist
Billy the Kid
Black Bart
Bono
Butch Cassidy
Sundance Kid
Caligula
Captain America
Donatello
Elizabeth Arden
Duda
El Greco
Iron Man
Kim Il Sung
Jim McKay
Joe Louis
Josef Stalin
Leon Trotsky
Machine Gun Kelly
Mata Hari
Pele
Pink
Sugar Ray Robinson
Superman
The American Cincinnatus
The Edge
Tiger Woods
Vladimir Lenin
Voltaire
Really? You CANNOT be serious!!
People hide for reasons. What’s yours? But regardless, these inane posts from Trumpies shows why Mr. Whitbecks observations are rather dated. And that fear, hate and ignorance are more likely to win elections today than integrity, clarity and humility.
Nom de plumes really have you disconcerted. Your reaction is amusing.
You must have dropped out of high school before they got to Mark Twain / Samuel Clemens.
I know Samuel Clemens. I’ve read his autobiography. You sir are no Sam Clemens. More like…a cowardly blowhard. Please explain why you re afraid to show your face in this friendly discussion. We aren’t the Trump Justice department, set on ruining your life for speaking out. I will, however, lean into lies and mistrusth, like the claim that Biden weaponized the Justice Department. Read Jack Smith’s testimony before Rep. Jordan’s committee for what a true patriot does when his nation is threatened by a criminal conspiracy led by Donald Trump, a man who has no integrity, offers no clarity about his policy goals and has no humility.
Trump has no “humility”?
Recall during the Korean War when the “humble” President Truman relieved Gen. Douglas MacArthur from command. Truman bitterly criticized MacArthur – but the American public was outraged and handed Truman a 22% approval rating – the lowest of any sitting president.
No one ever accused Douglas MacArthur of humility.
America does not need a “humble” president. Nor does the American public want one.
Jack Smith is the evil reincarnation of Andrey Vyshinsky. Smith’s wiretap surveillance of U.S. Congressmen and a Senator, as well as 109 other innocents is the worst abuse of legal process in this country, in this century. Smith also used extralegal threats to debank his targets, none of whom were indicted. There is no U.S. statute which allows a prosecutor to debank individuals without any legal process.
Smith’s sidekick Thomas Windom already has a criminal referral pending. We should know shortly what the Office of Special Counsel does with Smith.
Smith’s perversion of the American legal apparatus is one entirely adequate reason to use a nom de plume. However, he is not the only politically motivated psychopath out there. Other left wingnuts are now threatening to “Kirk” their perceived enemies. Further reasons to use a nom de plume.
Andrei Vyshinsky – I remember his name from The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Him and Nikolai Krylenko presided over many of the show trials that prosecuted alleged “counter-revolutionary” conduct in the Soviet Union.
Trump was politically naive and should have pardoned everyone that could have been a potential suspect in the January 6th “insurrection”.
The only real case that Smith could have argued in court with some possible merit was the classified documents case – but he botched it procedurally and it got dismissed.
Smith did not wiretap. More lies told without accountability by a an anonymous coward. Read the transcript. He legally sought and obtained information on when calls were placed by members of congress and others who were telling Trump his lies about elections being stolen were factually incorrect, or who were calling Trump to ask him to recall his insurrectionists storm troopers. No content was revealed. But the timelines were key to show that Trump knew he was lying when he created the insurrection. I encourage all to read the transcript. It’s very illuminating. And not at all what the Trumpie Robots are being told to say.
You should go to Powerline Blog and read John Hindraker’s January 1st piece:
“Krazee-Eyez Killa Testifies”
He simply demolished Jack ‘Vyshinksy’ Smith’s totalitarian view of the law as expressed in his December 17th House Judiciary Committee deposition of which you are so fond . A taste of Hindraker’s analysis, with verbatim extracts from the deposition:
“Other aspects of the deposition have given rise to minor news stories, but I want to concentrate on just one point: Smith’s determination to send Trump to prison for his actions relating to the January 6 protest in Washington. I don’t think Trump covered himself in glory that day, but what did he do that was a crime? He said that he thought the election had been stolen. So what?
Q. But the President’s statements that he believed the election was rife with
fraud, those certainly are statements that are protected by the First Amendment, correct?
A. Absolutely not. If they are made to target a lawful government function and they are made with knowing falsity, no, they are not. That was my point about fraud not being protected by the First Amendment.
Q. I mean, there is a long list of disputed elections, I mean, the election of 1800,
1960, year 2000, where candidates believed they were wronged by the — you know, because they lost. And there’s a long history of candidates speaking out about they believe there’s been fraud, there’s been other problems with the integrity of the election process. And I think you would agree that those types of statements are sort of at the core of the First Amendment rights of a Presidential candidate, right?
Of course they are. Election integrity is a critically important issue on which all are allowed to speak freely. Watch what Smith does next:
A. There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case. As we said in the indictment, he was free to say that he thought he won the election. He was even free to say falsely that he won the election.
But what he was not free to do was violate Federal law and use knowing — knowingly false statements about election fraud to target a lawful government function. That he was not allowed to do. And that differentiates this case from any past history.
Smith refers here to the counting of electoral ballots that was going on in the Capitol on January 6. There is a federal crime of interfering with lawful processes, but Trump never told his supporters, or anyone else, to obstruct the electoral vote counting. On the contrary, he told them to demonstrate peacefully and patriotically.
More, from later in the deposition:
Q. So did you develop evidence that President Trump, you know, was responsible for the violence at the Capitol on January 6th?
A. So our view of the evidence was that he caused it and that he exploited it and that it was foreseeable to him.
Not a crime, obviously.
Q. But you don’t have any evidence that he instructed people to crash the Capitol, do you?
A . As I said, our evidence is that he in the weeks leading up to January 6th created a level of distrust. He used that level of distrust to get people to believe fraud claims that weren’t true. He made false statements to State legislatures, to his supporters in all sorts of contexts and was aware in the days leading up to January 6th that his supporters were angry when he invited them and then he directed them to the Capitol.
True or not, none of this is even arguably a crime.
Now, once they were at the Capitol and once the attack on the Capitol happened, he refused to stop it.
“Refusing to stop it,” assuming that is correct, is not a crime.
He instead issued a tweet that without question in my mind endangered the life of his own Vice President. And when the violence was going on, he had to be pushed repeatedly by his staff members to do anything to quell it.
And then even afterwards he directed co-conspirators to make calls to Members of Congress, people who had were his political allies, to further delay the proceedings.
Nothing itemized here is even close to being a criminal act. Trump had a legal theory according to which the vice president had discretion to decide which slate of electors to approve in a disputed state. It was a weak legal theory, to be sure. But was it as weak as, for example, the theory the Supreme Court accepted in Roe v. Wade? No. In any event, advancing a weak legal argument is obviously not a crime.”
If you go to House Judiciary’s web site you can now download the entire deposition. You will note that the members of House Judiciary – both Republicans and Democrats – are as concerned about personal security as those of us who use noms de plume. They redacted their names entirely. So those of us who reject your demands to commit suicide are in good company.
I have never seen any proof Jack Smith wiretapped anyone – he did receive meta-data of phone calls – but the content of those calls has never been revealed via surveillance.
The Congressmen and Senators beg to differ with you. The FBI has only admitted to “preliminary toll analysis”, but that is the procedure which immediately precedes voice and text collection – traditional “wire tapping”.
It appears that the full scope of Jack ‘Vyshinsky’ Smith’s illegal effort is buried under classifications. One Senator, who sits on the Judiciary Committee Subcommittees on the Constitution; Privacy, Technology is digging. It appears that the FBI has buried the Congressional wire taps in their hidden files, which even Director Patel is having difficulty accessing.
Title III search warrants need to be approved by a United States District Judge and requested by an Asst. U.S. Atty.
If this was not done then it could be deemed illegal.
The FBI has done this in the past – but it is certainly not legal.
Bill, you sure know how to pick ’em. You are the best. Another premier focus on the best of Michigan’s political history. Unfortunate that I admire your optimism, wish to emulate it, but cannot escape my eternal skeptic frame of mind. I really do hope not to dip too far into cynicism.
. . . with all respect to Judge Whitbeck: What we want from our politicians . . .
1) integrity
2) clarity
3) modesty
Admirable qualities without a doubt.
Engenders a question within me . . . while we seek to attain, are we currently getting it? Sorry, no. Instead, as the latest discussions point out, even we, the people, have a hard time seeing these qualities even when it is plain before us. Instead, we focus on legal nuances, gotcha distinctives and pet peeves. Sit [not] in the seat of mockers Prov 1:1.
Case in point appears to be Prosecutor Jack “V? ;)” Smith. In general, I perceive him as a regular scum bag whether he personally put on his headset to eaves drop on ~50% of the US government (essentially every conservative who is really a conservative) or put a legalese gun to the head of Verizon, T Mobile and AT&T’s CEO heads to turn over records sans subpoenas. But Mr. Smith is the least of my gripe.
Who, or what, gave Mr. Smith the tools and/or cajónes to attempt such a maneuver in the first place? The COVID 19 emergency acts. And what was the enabler of the COVID acts? The Patriot Act (yes, as modified by the USA Freedom Act). And who was one of the main proponents of the Patriot Act? The Mr. Rogers I wouldn’t want to be my neighbor. And who has a high likelihood of becoming our next Senator just in time to defend keeping his signature act in effect? Yep. Mr. Mike Rogers.
Here is where I need to put in an aside concerning our TBR version libertarian participants. Instead of worrying about freeing their aught-to-be hero, Edward Snowdon, or our slow, now quick, erosion of our Habeas Corpus and Posse Comitatus rights (like Rand Paul is doing), who do they show themselves to be? Yep, their own flavor of Never Trumpers. Sheeesh. Michigan seems to be an epicenter although the last election showed them only somewhere < 10%.
Every “conservative” who prides themselves for voting for “W” Bush but now hates Trump, really needs to soul search themselves about why they would put a little personal scolding above the essential foundations of our constitutional republic and open the floodgates to communist domination.
The COVID emergency acts are going away. But the Patriot/USA Freedom Act is still alive and well. And we are about to elect one of its main cheerleaders irrespective of him somehow (magically?) voting to save us $$ (as his campaign fliers insist). How? By saving himself from having to charge US citizens for the cost of pulling a subpoena? Wake up. These people have no integrity, clarity or modesty.
Thanks Bill!
Civil libertatians need to fight the onslaught of onerous and invasive legislation that is inimical to the public interest – see my comment below of the Patriot Act and SORA and you may agree why lawyers like Jack Smith have to much power.
The “Patriot Act” has been subject to judicial review by the federal judiciary and significant parts have been invalidated as unconstitutional as violative of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of our U.S. Constitution.
Michigan’s Sex Offender Registry Act (SORA) was so poorly written that at one point the Michigan Department of Attorney General AGREED with the American Civil Liberties Union that parts of the act needed to be invalidated as violating the Ex Post Facto Clause of the constitution.
Over the last ten years federal court litigation testing the constitutionality of SORA has led to numerous sections being held unconstitutional and unenforceable for varying reasons. These have included being void for vagueness and hence violating the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the federal constitution.
One case from Jackson County where a 16-year old convicted of consensual sexual conduct with another minor as a misdemeanor was an example of problems with SORA. The Michigan Legislature in 2012 amended SORA to limit the classes of sex offender registrants who need report their addresses for yearly updates. That juvenile registrant stopped reporting his address. The Michigan State Police notified the Jackson County Prosecutor of his failure to make an annual address update to the MSP registry database for SORA; as a result an arrest warrant issued and the registrant was convicted by a judge and sentenced to prison for violating SORA reporting requirements. Neither the judge, relevant county prosecutorial official nor public defender appeared to be aware of the 2012 legislative amendments which made the registrant ineligible to mandatory address reporting. After serving 17 months in state prison, a corrections officer noticed that the crime the SORA registrant had been convicted of was repealed two years before the alleged violation occurred. The court eventually set aside the conviction – so a SORA registrant was convicted of a crime that did NOT exist.
The Patriot Act and SORA are examples of hyper-activity by legislators that are toxic to the public interest.